AgroChemistry and Soil Science

 Reviewing a manuscript is carried out as a process of obtaining from experts in a certain area an assessment of the scientific significance of an article and a conclusion on the possibility of its publication, identification of shortcomings and recommendations to authors and editors to improve quality.
 The editors of the AgroChemistry and Soil Science take measures to ensure high professional and ethical standards based on the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice of Scientific Publishing.
 The editors conduct a comprehensive peer review of manuscripts to eliminate plagiarism and ensure quality publications.
 The peer review procedure is mandatory for all manuscripts submitted for consideration to select the most relevant and acceptable for publication works in order to maintain a high scientific level of the ACSS.
 Reviewers are members of the Editorial Board of the AgroChemistry and Soil Science or independent highly professional external experts who have their own publications on the topic of the manuscript to be reviewed.
 Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions, and also helps the author improve the article.
 The AgroChemistry and Soil Science uses one-sided blind peer review: the article metadata is disclosed to the reviewer, and the reviewer's personal data is not disclosed to the authors.

 1. Initial control regarding the completeness and correctness of execution and compliance with Manuscript Requirements (see below). Executed by the executive secretary;
 2. Initial expert assessment of the manuscript and the definition of a reviewer from the editorial board in charge of the relevant scientific direction, or an external reviewer. Preference is given to reviewers who are known experts in the subject matter of this manuscript and who have published in this area of research over the past 10 years. Executed by the editor-in-chief or his deputy;
 3. Determination of the level of uniqueness of the author's text (check for plagiarism) is carried out by an editorial officer;
 4. The manuscript is reviewed by the selected reviewer. The duty of the reviewer is to objectively assess the content of a scientific article, determine its compliance with the scientific directions of the journal and conduct a thorough analysis of the advantages and disadvantages, while observing the relevant rules of publication ethics. The term for reviewing the manuscript by the reviewer does not exceed three weeks.
 The editors recommend downloading and using for reviewing the typical Review form developed by the editors and posted on the website.
 The main aspects to be peer reviewed by the reviewer:
 • relevance of the raised scientific problem;
 • theoretical and applied significance of research;
 • the adequacy of the selected methodological approaches;
 • correctness of the given mathematical calculations, graphs, figures;
 • observance by the authors of the rules of scientific ethics, correctness of references to literature.
 • personal contribution of the author to the solution of the problem.
 • the authenticity and validity of the conclusions of the author (s) in this work.
 • correlation of the author's conclusions with modern scientific concepts.
 Based on the results of reviewing the manuscript, the reviewer can recommend (after eliminating the identified deficiencies) or not recommend the article for publication. In any case, the reviewer must justify his decision in the review.
 The editors recommend the reviewer to give advice to authors (especially young scientists) on possible ways to improve the quality of the manuscript.
 The reviewer sends the completed review to the editorial office by e-mail in the form of a scanned copy.
 5. The reviewer may refuse to review if, after getting acquainted with the work, he admits his own insufficient qualifications on the issues discussed in the manuscript, or if a conflict of interest is identified. In this case, the Editor-in-Chief (or his deputy) sends the manuscript to another reviewer. Additional reviewing can also be assigned in case of acute controversy of the provisions expressed in the manuscript.
 6. The editorial office sends the authors electronic copies of reviews (unnamed so as not to disclose information about the reviewer) or a reasoned refusal of the editorial board to publish the manuscript, as well as the editor's recommendations for improving the manuscript (the executor is the secretary of the editorial board).
 7. After the final editing of the improved (corrected by the author) manuscript, the final version is agreed with the author. It is the responsibility of the contact author to ensure that all coauthors are familiar with the final version of the manuscript.
 The materials received by the editors are not returned to the authors even if the manuscript is rejected.

 The author, realizing his responsibility to the scientific community for the quality of the publication, must guarantee the following:
 • the manuscript was created specifically for publication in AgroChemistry and Soil Science, was not published earlier and was not sent simultaneously to other journals;
 • the manuscript was created on the basis of the results of the author's own research, and the conclusions are based on a personal impartial position;
 • data is reliable, obtained as a result of original research work, not falsified or borrowed.
 • regarding data not obtained by the author himself, the sources of information are clearly indicated;
 • cited only those publications, ideas or results of which were used in the process of setting tasks, or in the analysis of the results obtained, as well as those that influenced the definition of the nature of the work and are necessary for understanding the essence of the work. The list of cited publications is complete and is formed according to the Instructions for authors AgroChemistry and Soil Science;
 • the manuscript does not contain excessive borrowing, unformulated quotations, paraphrasing, appropriation of rights to the results of other people's research;
 • all persons who participated in the research are mentioned in the manuscript as co-authors or they are thanked; all co-authors saw the final edition of the manuscript, agree with its publication and are responsible for the data, conclusions and citing sources;
 • information obtained privately, in the course of conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, is not used in the manuscript without the explicit permission of the researcher from whom this information was obtained;
 • in the manuscript of the review article, the author relies on his own research (analysis) and personal understanding of the compiled literary material;
 • the manuscript clearly identifies any hazards and risks associated with conducting research;
 • the author undertakes to inform the editorial board of any conflict of interest if it arises during (or as a result of) the preparation of the manuscript;
 • in the process of preparing the manuscript, the author was guided by the rules for authors AgroChemistry and Soil Science;
 • the author should, in the case of a significant error or inaccuracy in an already published work, to notify urgently the editor-in-chief of the ACSS and cooperate with him to refute or correct the article in the next issue.

 The review is the main tool for determining the quality of the manuscript, improving the author's text, and is the main argument for deciding whether to publish. The most important thing in the work of a reviewer is his professionalism and impartiality and confidentiality. Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions, and through editorial communication with the author can help the author improve the article.
 Reviewers should adhere to the COPE Guidelines for Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers.
 Peer reviewers should adhere to the COPE's Ethical Guidelines for Peer-reviewers.
 The reviewer can be a scientist with experience in research work on the subject of the evaluated manuscript.
 The reviewer cannot be the co-author of the peer-reviewed work, the supervisor of the author (co-authors) and an employee of the department where the author (co-authors) works.
 The reviewer must as objectively as possible evaluate the presented experimental or theoretical work, its interpretation and presentation, and also determine the compliance of the work with scientific and linguistic standards. The reviewer must respect the intellectual independence of the authors.
 If the reviewer doubts his competence in any of the key aspects of the work, or he/she has a conflict of interest with the author or the organization that submitted the manuscript for consideration, or he/she does not have enough time to familiarize himself/herself with the work, he/she is obliged to inform the editor-in-chief and refuse peer review.
 The reviewer must maintain confidentiality and not discuss the content of the manuscript with persons not involved in the publication workflow, and also not use unpublished data contained in the work without the official permission of the authors.
 The reviewer should take into account the possibility of a conflict of interest in the case when the manuscript in question is related to the current or published work of the reviewer. If in doubt, the reviewer should immediately return the manuscript to the editorial board without a review, indicating a conflict of interest.
 The reviewer should draw the editor's attention to any significant similarities between the reviewed manuscript and another published work. In the case when the reviewer is sure that any part of the text, illustrations, conclusion or argument has already been published earlier, that is, there is plagiarism or verbatim copying of the author's earlier works (self-plagiarism), he/she must inform the editor. Any statement by the reviewer that an observation, conclusion, or suggestion was previously known must be supported by an appropriate quotation.
 The reviewer should point to relevant published articles on the subject of the manuscript, which the authors should cite, but not cited.
 The reviewer is obliged to clearly argue his comments, which must be accompanied by an appropriate link.
 The reviewer should be aware that a delay in sending a review to the editorial office might be regarded as an improper gaining of a competitive advantage.
 The editors recommend downloading and using for reviewing the typical review form.

 The activities of the Editor-in-Chief, members of the Editorial Board and staff of the editorial office of the AgroChemistry and Soil Science are based on the observance of moral standards in relations with authors and reviewers.
 All papers submitted to the journal go through thematic selection and scientific peer review. The editorial board has the right to reject the manuscript or return it for revision.
 The editor-in-chief and the editorial board evaluate the manuscript impartially, solely according to its scientific content - regardless of race, gender, religious beliefs, nationality, citizenship, origin, social status, political views and place of work of the authors.
 Decisions on publication are made on the basis of scientific reviews and conclusions of the members of the editorial board regarding the compliance of this work with generally accepted criteria, objectives and goals of the journal and its importance to the scientific community. The process of peer review of manuscripts should be as objective as possible. The final decision on the possibility of publishing the manuscript is made by the editor-in-chief and / or the editorial board of the AgroChemistry and Soil Science.
 The editor-in-chief and the editorial board should not have a conflict of interest related to the manuscripts that they reject or accept, and they should also avoid involving scientists in the review process who may have a conflict of interest with the author.
 The editor-in-chief and the editorial board should not have a conflict of interest related to the manuscripts that they reject or accept, and they should also avoid involving scientists in the review process who may have a conflict of interest with the author.
 If any of the editors / members of the editorial board becomes aware of their own conflict of interest already during the consideration of the manuscript, he must inform other members of the board, leave the review process and delegate his powers to another editor / member of the editorial board.
 The editors / editorial board maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript review process and do not allow information to be disclosed outside the circle of persons involved in the publication workflow. None of the persons familiar with the content of the submitted works can use the information provided there without the official permission of the authors.
 The conclusions and proposals of scientific reviewers (without identifying the identity of the reviewer) and the editor are sent only to the author's email address for use in correcting the manuscript.
 Neither the editors nor the editorial board are responsible for the opinions expressed by the authors and views on the interpretation of the research results described in the manuscript of the article.
 Unpublished materials disclosed in the manuscript may not be used in the editors' own research without the written permission of the author.

 Financing of the publication of the AgroChemistry and Soil Science is carried out at the expense of the NSC ISSAR (publisher) and the authors of the articles.
 The author or the author's team of the article reimburses the cost of publishing the article at the rate of 55 UAH per page (including the costs of editorial processing, printing and placement in databases). The cost of one page may change when the prices of the work producers change.
 The author of the article (or a group of authors) receives one printed copy of the journal free of charge.
 Employees of the NSC ISSAR, members of the editorial board and graduate students of the stationary form of education (if the graduate student is the only one author of the manuscript) are exempted from payment.
 Distribution of electronic texts of individual articles and the collection as a whole in PDF format is free on the ACSS website.
 Dissemination of printed copies of the AgroChemistry and Soil Science is carried out through the web-site of the NSC ISSAR. The price of one printed copy is equal to the price determined by the printing house for the issue.